The rising deaths and incredible suffering stemming from Typhoon Hiayan has me thinking of the aftermath. Sure there is a lot of work to be done, and certainly the humanitarian issues will continue to mount with so much death, loss and much of the Philippine infrastructure is destroyed.
But what about after the instant emergency slows and the recovery efforts become a slog and shift into a long-term grind? With constricted resources one study suggests that conflict will increase, that rapid onset disasters like this typhoon contribute to conflict more than anything else. It goes on to say that there’s a chance for more sweeping peace-building as long-term recovery efforts continue. But that these chances for peace-building don’t override what is happening.
So I wonder how to carry out these chances? Does one wait? how long?
Until people are in conflict over needs like water, food and shelter? Or is there a way to structure recovery aid to take advantage of the chance and really build peace?
At the moment no one can argue that instant needs have to be addressed, with several groups like this taking the lead. Perhaps there’s a chance for peace-building in later stages through economic development as they rebuild and recover?
What about UN departments like this who don’t even mention the Crisis on the homepage (as of this writing)?
With all my conflict resolution training and growing skills (thanks to the NECR Program) I worry about the practical application of these skills. When people are dead, dying, sick, suffering, needing basics to survive, it can be overwhelming for the Conflict Resolution (CR) practitioner.
What do you think?